SIAP, I didn't see this posted yet but a movie poster caught my eye and I see the trailer was released last week.



Plot- As war rages between humanity and artificial intelligence forces, ex-special forces agent Joshua is recruited to find a person who has developed advanced artificial intelligence and a mystical weapon that could finally end the war.

I could understand why this flew under the radar with IJ5, Oppenheimer, Barbie, and such catching more attention. It seems like an old tale though the execution might be interesting.

Odd note- Sturgill Simpson is listed in the cast.

Your thoughts?

Looked interesting.

Never heard of it. Interested.

Just watched a video from corridor crew on this talking about effects. The nuclear explosion here - was shown to use footage from real life Beirut explosion. They are hiding it a bit with layered cgi, but the base is a real explosion that killed people.

dude95 said:

---

Just watched a video from corridor crew on this talking about effects. The nuclear explosion here - was shown to use footage from real life Beirut explosion. They are hiding it a bit with layered cgi, but the base is a real explosion that killed people.

---

That is not ok

This is not a documentary.

If they were showing footage of the explosion in some way where the characters were watching news or were living in the city when they explosion occurred and were affected by it, that would be one thing.

If they appropriated the explosion footage to be part of a story that is in no way associated with the time or location where it really happened, then no, not ok.

Thanks for the response. I do understand your point, but I don't think I'm quite there.

Regarding the use of real footage, look at the ending of the original version of Midway. In the movie, a fictional character crashes his dive bomber into an aircraft carrier and dies in a massive fireball. Given that such a scene would have been prohibitively expensive and dangerous to actually replicate, they used existing archival footage of such a crash landing. In this case, it was a jet fighter (which is why I remember it so well given that said jet fighter did not exist in WWII), but it also represents the real death of a fighter pilot. This was footage used for commercial purposes, i.e., the original Midway movie making money. I don't really have an opinion on this but will ask, is this justifiable or out-of-bounds?

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

---

Regarding the use of real footage, look at the ending of the original version of Midway. In the movie, a fictional character crashes his dive bomber into an aircraft carrier and dies in a massive fireball. Given that such a scene would have been prohibitively expensive and dangerous to actually replicate, they used existing archival footage of such a crash landing. In this case, it was a jet fighter (which is why I remember it so well given that said jet fighter did not exist in WWII), but it also represents the real death of a fighter pilot. This was footage used for commercial purposes, i.e., the original Midway movie making money. I don't really have an opinion on this but will ask, is this justifiable or out-of-bounds?

---

My guess is they got permission from the military to use that footage in the film. It's a serviceman crashing on a carrier deck so very similar circumstances. Not like maybe using footage of an accidental explosion that killed civilians in a movie not related to the event. , if that's how they used it.

Plus, the original Midway movie didn't have the benefit of making a crash look realistic. Modern films have that technology.

Sidebar: is that crash footage the same as what is used in Hunt For Red October before the "this business will get out of control" dialogue?

maroon barchetta said:

---

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

---

Regarding the use of real footage, look at the ending of the original version of Midway. In the movie, a fictional character crashes his dive bomber into an aircraft carrier and dies in a massive fireball. Given that such a scene would have been prohibitively expensive and dangerous to actually replicate, they used existing archival footage of such a crash landing. In this case, it was a jet fighter (which is why I remember it so well given that said jet fighter did not exist in WWII), but it also represents the real death of a fighter pilot. This was footage used for commercial purposes, i.e., the original Midway movie making money. I don't really have an opinion on this but will ask, is this justifiable or out-of-bounds?

---

My guess is they got permission from the military to use that footage in the film. It's a serviceman crashing on a carrier deck so very similar circumstances. Not like maybe using footage of an accidental explosion that killed civilians in a movie not related to the event. , if that's how they used it.

Plus, the original Midway movie didn't have the benefit of making a crash look realistic. Modern films have that technology.

Sidebar: is that crash footage the same as what is used in Hunt For Red October before the "this business will get out of control" dialogue?

---

Yes, it is. Good eye!

Yeah, I agree with the guys in the video. They're co-opting real world tragedy and emotional reaction (even at a subconscious level as many viewers won't recall when they've seen those images before) to lend depth to their fictional movie events. Seems untoward.